Archive for April, 2007

Someday soon, you might wake up to the call to prayer from a Muslim muezzin. Millions of Europeans already do.

And liberals will still tell you that “diversity is our strength” — while Talibanic enforcers cruise our cities burning books and barber shops… the Supreme Court decides sharia law doesn’t violate the “separation of church and state” … and the Hollywood Left gives up gay rights in favor of the much safer charms of polygamy.

If you think this can’t happen, you haven’t been paying attention, as the hilarious and brilliant Mark Steyn — the most popular conservative columnist in the English-speaking world — shows to devastating effect in his New York Times bestseller, America Alone: The End of the World As We Know It.

As Steyn puts it, “The future belongs to the fecund and the confident. And the Islamists are both, while the West — wedded to a multiculturalism that undercuts its own confidence, a welfare state that nudges it toward sloth and self-indulgence, and a childlessness that consigns it to oblivion — is looking ever more like the ruins of a civilization.”

Europe, laments Steyn, is almost certainly a goner. The future, if the West has one, belongs to America alone-with maybe its cousins in brave Australia. But America can still survive, prosper, and defend its freedom only if it continues to believe in itself, in the sturdier virtues of self-reliance (not government), in the centrality of family, and in the conviction that our country really is the world’s last best hope.

Mark Steyn’s America Alone is laugh-out-loud funny — but it will also change the way you look at the world. And it is already the most talked-about conservative book of the year.

Unsubscribe:
This email was sent to tjacobson@houston.rr.com because this address is subscribed to Special Offers from Human Events. To unsubscribe or to update your email delivery preferences, click here.

“Everybody in politics lies, but [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it’s troubling.” David Geffen, media mogul

By 2000, the American people had their belly full of Marxists Bill and Hillary Clinton, and with the help of electronic voting machines, placed their trust in George Bush and the GOP. Not me. How well I remember the phony impeachment of Bill Clinton which was deliberately sabotaged by the Republicans. This serious process was sabotaged by Republican Congressman Henry Hyde and his cronies. I had the good fortune to see David Schippers, author of Sell Out: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment, speak at the Judicial Watch ‘Ethics in Government’ event in Washington, DC in October 2000. Schippers is a Democrat who got a first hand lesson about just how dirty and corrupt the political system in this country has become; his book is very compelling.

The foolish Republicans went after Bill Clinton for lying over a sexcapade when they knew the Cox Report was percolating in the background. Bill Clinton should have been impeached and then tried for treason. Treason defined as giving aid and comfort to the enemy, betraying your country. Clinton was a one man wrecking crew relating to our national security, putting not only our population at risk here at home, but to U.S. soldiers deployed world wide. In this writer’s opinion Bill Clinton is guilty of treason. This habitual, lying narcissist sold our national defense secrets to the Communist Chinese. The American people have never been given the whole truth about Clinton and his efforts to keep terrorists off U.S. soil. Why do you think his former National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger, stole original documents from the National Archives and shredded them? (Sandy Berger Pleads Guilty to Destroying 9/11 Documents – 911 Commission liar, Lee Hamilton, works for who? You got it.) Like ‘drop-his-pants-for any-female between 16 and 60,’ Billy Clinton, George Bush is also guilty of aiding and abetting our enemies by ignoring the law and the will of the American people in keeping our borders wide open for this massive invasion and allowing terrorists to cross over. Bush’s co-conspirators are boozer lady killer, Teddy Chappaquidick Kennedy, pro-communism chicks Feinstein, Pelosi, Hillary Clinton and the four cowardly border governors: Napolitano, Schwarzenegger, Richardson and Perry.

Republican faithful are confused, distressed and trying to defend the defenseless by George Bush. I receive a dozen e-mails a day asking me why people want to impeach Bush and Cheney? Our fellow Americans really don’t understand the bigger picture nor can they entertain the idea that this man, like his father, has betrayed this republic and her people. It’s just too painful. It’s the left-wing wackos who hate Bush! It’s painful for those who voted for him and the uncertainty makes people nervous, insecure and upset because they really don’t know what to think anymore. They don’t want to have to confront pure evil, they just want it to go away, so they ignore the hard facts and hope “someone” in office will make things right. It’s also easier to blame the left or right wing which-ever-label gets the most play this week. Bush supporters should remember these words of wisdom from President Teddy Roosevelt:

“The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else.” Roosevelt in the Kansas City Star, 149, May 7, 1918

There is a strong movement in this country to impeach Bush and Cheney. The e-mails I’m getting are full of pain and questions: why? One cannot understand the why unless they are mentally prepared to accept the truth, forget playing the liberal v conservative boogie man game and realize that we are in deep, deep trouble. It also takes a sizable chunk of time to read and research. If one is to reach an informed decision, it can’t be based on just a few minutes listening to media hucksters like O’Reilly, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin or the popular leftists. It must be based on facts. Bush simply picked up where his father left off in the quest for one world government as so eloquently written by Jeri Lynn Ball three years ago:

“In Stalin’s Russia, notes Mikhail Heller, enemies were blamed for everything; they were used to justify the invasion of Czechoslovakia (1968), the invasion of Afghanistan in 1980, and so on. The Soviet Communists were thus able to manipulate Soviet citizens into supporting government hunts for “terrorists,” “traitors,” and spies, for “liberation wars” for humanity.

“Using Marxist-Leninist strategies, the Russian, Chinese, and U.S. ruling elites have sought to frighten Americans and other populations with the specter of ruthless mass terror. They have created enemies and blamed them for everything including terrorist acts. They have used them …to manipulate Americans into supporting government hunts for “traitors,” “terrorists,” and these never ending “wars of national liberation.” Their aim is to manipulate whole populations into supporting “wars of national liberation” and achieving not only the sovietization of “liberated” underdeveloped countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq, but also the full altruization and sovietization of the United States and other Western nations.

“On September 20, 2001, President Bush said, “Americans are asking: Who attacked our country? The evidence we have gathered all points to…al Qaeda…This group and its leader – a person named Osama bin Laden – are linked to many other organizations in different countries…There are thousands of these terrorists in more than 60 countries. They are recruited from their own nations…and brought to camps in places like Afghanistan, where they are trained in the tactics of terror. The Chinese and Russian Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ruling elites were the originators and developers of air terrorism, they have provided terrorist training courses for Arab guerrillas and global Communists, and they have thus been able to blame acts of terrorism on “fanatics” and “rogue terrorists.”

“Today, however, the Russian killers are back in Afghanistan, providing “humanitarian” aid to the “oppressed” peoples. The Russian, Chinese, and American governing elites manipulated the American people into fighting a “liberation war” in Afghanistan. On January 28, 2003, President Bush said, “In Afghanistan, we helped liberate an oppressed people.” The Bush Administration now seeks to assist the Russians in their attempt to achieve the altruization and sovietization of Afghanistan, promoting community building and community values (the Communist morality), “strengthening” institutions, “educating” the children, developing media capacity, setting up “cultural exchange programs,” and otherwise remaking Afghanistan in the image of the Soviet Communist totalitarian police state.”

The Internet is awash with columns, articles and blogs on impeaching Bush and Cheney. I would respectfully submit that one of the most cohesive, articulate and legally on point is by Elizabeth De la Vega, a former federal prosecutor. Ms. De la Vega did what I did in McVeigh’s Second Trial: She writes the case against Bush and Cheney in the form of an indictment and allows the American people to be the grand jury. Impeachment is dead serious and should not be undertaken without careful consideration, but it cannot be ignored because of party loyalty or denial. Ms. De la Vega is not some bug eyed “Bush hater.” This woman, like millions of us, know the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan are based on lies and this cannot stand for our magnificent republic. I encourage you to set aside some time to read her work:

“Be care what you wish for” is very appropriate here because if Bush and Cheney were to be impeached, the next in line for the presidency is another Marxist (political ideology is communism), Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi. Just the thought of this female becoming the president of these united States of America is so repulsive, so sickening, I simply run out of words. Should Bush be impeached? I believe it is the only choice because no one is above the law. Should Cheney be impeached? Yes, and I believe he would be criminally charged in the 911 mass slaughter if a real, impartial grand jury with some brains were able to do a thorough investigation of that day and that means subpoenas. Will either Bush or Cheney be impeached or will the real rulers of Washington, DC and our lives, allow them to stay in office and go through another pretend election in November 2008? Only time will tell.

Everyday Bush and Cheney remain in office, more of our precious military are being slaughtered in this unholy invasion/empire building exercise in the Middle East and other places around the world where we should not be. Bush should be charged with crimes against humanity for not stopping the use of depleted uranium against the people of Afghanistan, Iraq and our own soldiers. Pelosi has already shown to her constituency that she serves her money masters and is incapable of any leadership, foreign or domestic. Every American must make up their own mind as to whether or not Bush and Cheney should be impeached based on the facts and evidence.

The pain America will experience in the next few years is going to be excruciating. I wish it were going to be different, but because of America’s indifference and blind loyalty to the Democrat and Republican parties, forsaking truth and accountability, the situation has escalated to a dangerous level; the road ahead is going to be difficult and challenging. However, I believe that the millions of us who know the truth will stay the course and continue to fight to stop the destruction of this republic no matter how impossible the odds. We have no choice.

It is a stated goal of the Bilderberg Group, the Trilateral Commission and the CFR to promote what they call ‘interdependence’ and to lobby governments to sell off key infrastructure such as roads, lakes, ports, and highways to international corporations so that corporations can grow to be bigger in size than government.

44 of the world’s 100 biggest economies are not countries, they are corporations. There is no vote, there is no access to shareholder or CEO records. These corporations take over governmental functions by paying off politicians to hand over assets and then declare there to be no means of oversight of their activities.

In 1997 the Communist Chinese government took over the Long Beach Naval Air Base, the only major deep water port that can take large ships on the west coast. In 2000, the Communist Chinese, Hutchinson Whampoa which is run by the PLA, took over the Panama Canal and has stationed between 15,000 and 30,000 troops at the facility.

May we remind our readers that top Chinese generals continue to threaten nuclear attacks on America. There is absolutely no mention of the Chinese takeover of these facilities amidst the media merry-go-round of the UAE ports debate and the same people that now criticize the UAE deal, like Chuckie Schumer, supported the ports sell-out to the Communist Chinese under Bill Clinton.

Alex Jones’ first documentary film America: Destroyed By Design, made in 1997, warned Americans that the sell-out to the Chinese was the first step on the road to the sacking of the American economy and pulling the plug on key US infrastructure.

Click here to view a segment where Alex Jones discusses the Chinese sell-out.

Why are people so concerned about the United Arab Emirates when the fastest growing military on the planet and a superpower that continually threatens to annihilate the US has been metaphorically handed the keys to the kingdom and is encircling the country?

During the Chinese sell-out it was Republican politicians that would bash Bill Clinton for making the deal yet it was yesterday’s Republicans and today’s Neo-Cons who were affiliated with the companies making millions from the transfer. This is why we are less than confident that Democrats have any real agenda to stop the UAE deal.

Just as now claims of ‘Islamophobia’ are raised to attack critics of the UAE deal, in 1997 and 2000 it was ‘Asianphobia’. This has nothing to do with race, it is a matter of national sovereignty. If American corporations tried to buy up key Chinese infrastructure they would be firmly rebuffed.

As a country we are not just being robbed of our ability to create wealth, we are being robbed of our infrastructure, our land and our capacity to work the land. Your currency, your future and your sovereignty is systematically being dismantled, looted and sold to the highest bidder. The taxpayer pays for and builds the infrastructure only for foreign lobbyists to pay off corrupt politicians who ‘lease’ the infrastructure or outright sell it to the foreign lobbyists for 50, 60, 70 years.

The continued weakness of the dollar allows foreign entities to step in and buy more and more infrastructure while American families work three or four jobs just to get by.

The United Arab Emirates is a British holding and the British empire is simply re-shuffling some of its marbles. Claims that the UAE has links to terrorism are a distraction. The fact is that the UAE is in the pocket of the Globalists and is simply a front for the Internationalists to swallow up more of American sovereignty.

What we have is an ‘oligopoly’. What is an oligopoly? It is where, similar to the Italian mafia, cartels and different corporate owners meet to affect the same thing as a monopoly. They decide which countries will control which interests and that is how the New World Order works

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on SELLOUT OF AMERICA NEVER ENDS

Led by Maj. Gen. Yahya L. Solayman, War Planning chief at the Syrian armed forces General Staff, the delegation represents all branches of the Syrian armed forces. On their arrival on April 18, the Syrian officers went straight into conference with Iranian defense minister Brig. Gen. Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar, Revolutionary Commanders chief Maj. Gen. Yahya Rahim-Safavi and dep. chief of staff Maj. Gen. Hassani Sa’di, who is Iran’s chief of military war preparations. The Syrian visitors were taken around RG and armed forces training installations and given a display of the latest Iranian weapons systems, including stealth missiles, electronic warfare appliances and undersea missiles and torpedoes. They also visited the big Imam Ali training base in N. Tehran, where hundreds of Lebanese Hizballah and Palestinian Hamas and Jihad Islami terrorists are taking courses.

In Washington and Jerusalem, there is little doubt that the two allies timed the Syrian delegation’s mission to Tehran as a rejoinder to US defense secretary Robert Gates’ Middle East tour last week.

Israel sees four causes for concern:

1. The unusually large size of the Syrian delegation and the presence of operations officers from the various army corps.

2. The elevated positions of the Iranian officials hosting the Syrians: the top men with responsibility for preparing the RGs and armed forces for armed conflict.

US and Israeli intelligence experts agreed in their talks during Gates’ two-day visit to Israel last week on the object of the Syrian mission: to tighten operational coordination at the highest level between the Syria military and Iran’s armed forces and Revolutionary Guards.

3. The installations and weapons shown the Syrian officers. The intelligence estimate is that they saw the weapons systems soon to be consigned by Iran to the Syrian army and Hizballah, as well as the types of assistance pledged for Syria in the event of a military showdown with the United States or Israel. Syrian-Iranian consultations must also be presumed to have cleared the routes by which these weapons would reach Syria and Hizballah in a military contingency.

During the 2006 Hizballah-Israel war, Iran ran an airlift to Damascus through Turkish airspace and over the Mediterranean.

4. The unusual length of the visit. Monday, April 23 the Syrian officers were still busy in Tehran after six days and showed no sign of leaving.

“ISRAEL”

(Originally published by JTF.ORG on October 27, 2004)Anwar Sadat, beloved in the West and by self-hating Jews as a “moderate” Arab leader, wore a swastika tie during a “peaceful” visit to IsraelSadat openly bragged of emulating two “great” historical figures, Hitler and the terrorist “prophet” of Islam, Mohammed

By pretending that he was a “moderate” Arab Muslim Nazi, the clever Egyptian Muslim Nazi military dictator Anwar Sadat did far more damage to America, Israel and the West than any less cunning Arab

The “moderate” Arab Muslim Nazi dictator of Egypt, Anwar Sadat, posed on the cover of his autobiographical In Search of Identity –Sadat’s search for identity led him to admire and to ape two of history’s worst butchers, Mohammed and Hitler

Last week, JTF noted that there are no Arab “moderates.” The universal goal of the Arab world is the destruction of America, Israel and Western civilization. The clever Arabs who pretend to be “moderate” when speaking to naive Christians and Jews are far more dangerous than the less clever Arabs who honestly and openly proclaim their Nazi genocidal goals. JTF proved the point by exposing the truth about the ultimate representative of the Arab “moderates,” the late Egyptian Muslim Nazi dictator Anwar el-Sadat, yimach shmo ve-zichro (may his name and memory be obliterated). See JTF’s October 20, 2004 article, Arab “Moderates” Are More Dangerous Than Openly Extremist Arabs (Part 1).

In his notorious autobiography, In Search of Identity, published in the United States in 1978, Sadat revealed that he had always been a devout Muslim. He explained that aside from emulating his lifelong hero Adolf Hitler, he also sought to emulate his other hero, the terrorist Muslim “prophet” Mohammed.

In 1972, two years after becoming Egypt’s Muslim Nazi dictator, Sadat gave a speech celebrating Mohammed’s birthday. In the speech, Sadat explained the Islamic attitude toward Jews:

“The most splendid thing the prophet Mohammed did was to drive them [the Jews] out of the whole Arabian peninsula…. They are a nation of liars and traitors, contrivers of plots, a people born for the deeds of treachery…. I promise you … we shall send them back to their former status … as the Koran said of them ‘condemned to humiliation and misery.'”

Imitating the vicious trickery of both Mohammed and Hitler, Sadat planned a surprise attack on little Israel to be staged on the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) in 1973, when the unprepared Jews would be fasting and praying in their synagogues.

Israel’s evil rulers, including Prime Minister Golda Meir, acceded to American pressure to allow the Arab Muslim Nazis to strike a devastating first blow against the Jewish homeland –Meir (second from l.) is shown during her first visit of state to Washington in 1969; with her are Henry Kissinger (second from r.), Yitzchak Rabin (l.) and Rabin’s wife Leah (r.), who called herself the “Jackie Kennedy of Israel”

The evil Israeli Government of Marxist Prime Minister Golda Meir knew about the Egyptian plans to attack. However, U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, a self-hating Jew, warned Israel not to strike preemptively against the Arab armies as the Jewish state did so successfully in the 1967 Six Day War. Kissinger and President Nixon demanded that Israel absorb the blow of a full-scale Arab attack rather than smash the invading Arab forces preemptively.

If Israel strikes first, Kissinger warned Golda Meir, “not a dogcatcher in the country will support Israel.”

The Nixon-Kissinger White House put relentless pressure on little Israel to absorb the blow of a massive Arab Muslim Nazi sneak attack –Nixon and Kissinger are shown with a young Congressman Donald
Rumsfeld

Tragically, Israel gave in to the Nixon-Kissinger Administration pressure, and as a result, the outcome of the 1973 Yom Kippur War was very different from the glorious and miraculous triumph in the 1967 Six Day War, when Israel wisely defied U.S. pressure not to strike first.

Richard Nixon’s pressure on Israel not to strike preemptively in 1973 cost her the lives of almost 3,000 brave young Jewish soldiers

All of the self-hating and cowardly Jews who insist that the Jew-hater Richard Nixon was a friend of Israel ignore the fact that Israel would not have lost almost 3,000 heroic Jewish soldiers if not for Nixon’s pressure on the Jewish State not to strike first.

On October 6, 1973, Egypt and Syria attacked Israel on two different fronts on Yom Kippur, the most sacred of all Jewish holidays.

The Marxist Labor Party Government in Israel was fatally overconfident about Israel’s ability to withstand the Arab attack. After winning so decisively in 1967, the Israeli Government and the Israeli army felt that Israel could easily repulse any Arab invasion. They were so certain of victory, they did not even mobilize the Israeli army reservists.

In 1973, to score a few public relations points with the Jew-hating world, the vile traitor Golda Meir intentionally left Israel unprepared for an impending Arab Muslim Nazi attack

Nor did they bother to warn the brave Jewish soldiers who were guarding Israel’s border that they were about to be attacked by huge Arab armies.

Along the Suez Canal, 500 Jewish soldiers were attacked by over 80,000 Egyptian Muslim Nazi soldiers. The hopelessly outnumbered Jews were completely unprepared for the massive Arab attack. Resisting with incredible courage, the vast majority of the 500 Jewish defenders were slaughtered holding back the Arab invasion while Israel mobilized her army reservists.

The vile traitors Golda Meir and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan explained at the time that they intentionally left Israel completely unprepared so that no one would doubt that the Arabs were the attackers.

To score a few public relations points with the Jew-hating world, Israel’s traitorous rulers allowed thousands of their brave young Jewish soldiers to die needlessly in the 1973 Yom Kippur War –Scenes of mourning by grief-stricken Israeli Jews greeted the return of their dead and wounded

In other words, in order to score a few public relations points, the Israeli Government knowingly allowed many heroic Jewish soldiers to be unnecessarily slaughtered.

This policy of willfully sacrificing the precious lives of innocent Jews to appease Jew-hating world opinion continues to this day as Israeli Bolshevik dictator Ariel Sharon deliberately allows hundreds of Jews to be murdered by Arab Muslim Nazi terrorists.

In the 1973 Yom Kippur War, Israel miraculously turned the tide after initially suffering enormous losses. Within two weeks, Israel’s valiant little army had surrounded the invading Egyptian forces, and the Israelis could easily have captured or destroyed all of them.

After initially suffering heavy losses, Israeli forces miraculously turned the tide and crossed the Suez Canal, liberating its western bank and spectacularly surrounding the invading Egyptian army –But a premature ceasefire, imposed by the Nixon-Kissinger White House on Israel’s cowardly Bolshevik rulers, prevented her from decisively destroying the Arab Muslim Nazi invaders

However, just as Israel was about to win her most decisive victory ever, the Nixon-Kissinger Administration demanded that the Jews accept a premature ceasefire that rescued the Egyptian army and that robbed the Jewish State of a final victory.

Despite all of this, Jews still describe the Jew-hater Nixon and the self-hating Jew Kissinger as “friends” of Israel. Not for nothing did Rabbi Meir Kahane often express amazement at how the same Jews who are so brilliant in science, art, literature and medicine, are so incredibly stupid when it comes to their own survival.

The hopelessly evil Israeli Government again gave in to U.S. pressure by allowing the surrounded Egyptian invaders to escape justice and thus preventing Israel from winning a decisive victory.

Every Israeli capitulation to U.S. pressure has led only to more pressure – and more Arab Muslim Nazi terrorism –The Traitor-in-Chief Bill Clinton and the late Marxist despot Yitzchak Rabin make “peace” with the Arab Hitler Yasser Arafat

The self-hating Jews who control Israel never learn that each time they give in to U.S. pressure, it always leads to catastrophe for the Jewish State. And each time that they show Washington that they are willing to give in to U.S. pressure, it always leads to far more U.S. pressure.

Israel’s submission to the Nixon-Kissinger Administration pressure before, during and after the 1973 Yom Kippur War was the beginning of the terrible decline of the Jewish State that we have witnessed to this day.

What is most striking are the results achieved by a clever Arab Nazi like Sadat versus the results achieved by a less clever Arab Nazi like Sadat’s predecessor, Gamal Abdul Nasser.

The open calls for genocide of avowed Jew-haters like the Arab Hitler Yasser Arafat brought the Arabs nothing but disaster

Nasser’s open calls for genocide against Israeli Jewry brought the Arabs nothing but disaster. Israel’s greatest triumphs were achieved when the Jews had no doubt that their Muslim enemies were united in seeking to destroy the Jewish people. Furthermore, Nasser’s Nazi rantings greatly reduced U.S. and international pressure on Israel to commit suicide. It was difficult to demand that Israel make suicidal concessions to Arabs who were openly proclaiming even to Westerners that they were irreversibly committed to exterminating the Jewish people.

When the Arabs were openly hostile, the Jews achieved their greatest triumphs –Jews from many nations fought in the 1948 War of Independence, against an Arab Muslim Nazi enemy which swore to “finish Hitler’s job”

On the other hand, Sadat’s strategy of playing “moderate” when speaking to Westerners but continuing to call for Israel’s annihilation when speaking to fellow Muslims, brought the Arabs many achievements in their relentless quest to destroy Israel. When the Jews were convinced that perhaps some of their Muslim Nazi enemies were “moderate,” it psychologically crippled Israel’s ability to wage war effectively. Instead of seeking decisive military victories against a Muslim world determined to destroy the Jewish State, the Jews started seeking “peace” with the Muslim Nazis through suicidal concessions.

Additionally, by telling Westerners that he wanted “peace,” Sadat greatly increased U.S. and international pressure on Israel to commit suicide. The world wants Israel to self-destruct, and it is much easier to demand suicidal Israeli concessions when the Muslim Nazis are claiming that they want “peace” when they speak to Western “infidels.”

In future articles, JTF will expose how Sadat got the “right-wing” Likud Government of Menachem Begin and Ariel Sharon to willingly retreat from the entire Sinai – the worst mistake in Israel’s history.

Throughout his lifetime, Sadat never stopped explaining to the Arabs that they must seek Israel’s extermination in stages through the use of more clever and deceptive tactics.

Responding to the PLO terrorist call to “push the Jews into the sea,” Sadat said: “We do not differ with the PLO on principles. We sometimes differ on tactics and methods.”

Responding to the PLO terrorist call to “push the Jews into the sea,” Sadat said on April 12, 1975:

“We do not differ with the PLO on principles. We sometimes differ on tactics and methods.”

Thus, the PLO “principles” of total Muslim Nazi genocide against the Jewish people were identical to Sadat’s “principles.” The only difference was that Sadat – following in the footsteps of his idols, Mohammed and Hitler – sought to more cleverly achieve his genocidal goal through more deceptive and effective “tactics and methods.”

This made Sadat the most dangerous Muslim Nazi leader whom Israel ever confronted.

Sadat was the most dangerous Muslim leader whom Israel ever confronted –Modern “moderate” Arab Muslim Nazi leaders who learned to play Sadat’s tricks on the West and on self-hating Jews in Israel include his former henchman, Egyptian Muslim Nazi military dictator Hosni Mubarak (front row, fourth from the left, seated to the left of Libyan terrorist tyrant Moammar Khaddafi); Muslim Nazi Jordan’s tyrannical King Abdallah (front row, sixth from the left, seated to the right of Khaddafi and in front of Syrian terrorist tyrant Bashar Assad); and “American ally” Khalifah Thani of Qatar (front row, second from the right, seated next to the Arab Hitler Yasser Arafat), whose tiny, oil-rich kingdom is home to the Islamic terrorist television network Al Jazeera

The only Jewish leader who consistently told the truth about Sadat and the other Arab Muslim Nazis was HaRav (The Rabbi) Meir Kahane, zecher tzadik livracha (may the memory of this saint be immortalized).

Today, the former Kahanists who once worked with Rabbi Kahane are the only ones telling the truth to the Jewish people. The Hilltop Youth, the Chayil (Valor) Party of Baruch Marzel, and heroic Jewish dissidents such as Noam Federman are the sole voices of truth and sanity in Israel.

JTF is proud to be the main U.S. fundraiser for the Hilltop Youth and other right-wing Jewish dissidents. If JTF’s allies take power in Israel some day, G-d willing, every Israeli Jew will finally learn the facts about the Arab Muslim Nazi enemy.

PENTAGON WANTS MORE

BAGHDAD — Suspected Sunni insurgents penetrated the Baghdad security net Wednesday, hitting Shiite targets with four bomb attacks that killed 183 people and raised the possibility of a powerful response by Shiite militias at a fragile time for the Iraqi government.

U.S. officials said there were indications the bombings were the work of Al Qaeda in Iraq, probably a provocation intended to draw the Mahdi Army, loyal to radical Shiite cleric Moqtada Sadr, back into the conflict. Such a reaction would recall the drawn-out sectarian bloodshed that followed the bombing of a revered Shiite shrine in Samarra last year. That strife began to ebb only when American and Iraqi forces launched their latest security clampdown in Baghdad.

But while sectarian killings have decreased, spectacular bombings on strategic targets have posed a new challenge, with an embarrassing attack in the heavily fortified Green Zone killing a lawmaker in the parliament building April 12 and a massive bombing that destroyed a key bridge on the same day.

The latest attacks also came just two days after six key ministers loyal to Sadr pulled out of the government.

On Wednesday, the total number of people killed or found dead in Iraq was 233, second only to a count of 281 killed or found dead on Nov. 23, 2006. Those figures are according to Associated Press recordkeeping, which began in May 2005.

The most devastating blast Wednesday struck the Sadriyah market as workers were leaving for the day, charring a lineup of mini-buses that came to pick them up. At least 127 people were killed and 148 wounded, including men who were rebuilding the market after a Feb. 3 bombing left 137 dead.

Wednesday’s bombing appeared meticulously planned, targeting a pedestrian entrance where tall concrete barriers had been erected after the earlier attack. It was the only way out of the compound, and the construction workers were widely known to leave about 4 p.m., the time of the bombing.

U.S. military spokesman Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said that Al Qaeda in Iraq was suspected. “Initial indications based on intelligence sources show that it was linked to Al Qaeda,” Caldwell said in a late-night telephone interview.

Echoing those remarks, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates called the bombings “horrifying” and accused Al Qaeda of being behind them. “We can only hope that the Shia will have the confidence in their government and in the coalition that we will go after the people that perpetrated this horror,” Gates said in Cairo, on the third day of a Middle East tour.

About an hour before the market was hit, a suicide car bomber crashed into an Iraqi police checkpoint at an entrance to Sadr City, the capital’s biggest Shiite Muslim neighborhood and a stronghold for the Mahdi Army militia. The explosion killed at least 41 people, including five Iraqi security officers, and wounded 76, police and hospital officials said.

During the noon hour, a parked car exploded near a private hospital in Karradah, a predominantly Shiite district in the center of Baghdad. At least 11 people died and 13 were wounded, police said. The blast damaged the Abdul-Majid hospital and other nearby buildings.

The fourth bomb exploded in a small bus in the central Rusafi area, killing four people and wounding six, police said.

The apparent inability of U.S. and Iraqi forces to prevent such attacks is a source of despair and anger on the streets of Baghdad and among some in the U.S. military.

“What security plan?” asked Qassim Nadhum, 40, who sells frozen meat in Sadriyah and was sprayed with shrapnel from the bomb. “The violence is continuing. All we get is traffic jams.”

Said Sattar Ali, 35, a bus driver who was also wounded, “This is not a plan; it’s just a show. It’s a failure.”

At the Pentagon, planners privately expressed concern. “We don’t have enough troops. It would take another 100,000” to protect Baghdad, one official told McClatchy News Service. Another said: “We are just trying the same things over and over again.” Neither official would agree to speak on the record, citing the sensitivity of the topic.

The attacks appeared to be yet another attempt by Sunni insurgents and Al Qaeda to force Shiite militiamen back onto the streets. Sadr had ordered his Mahdi Army fighters to put away their weapons and go underground before the security crackdown began, leaving regions like those bombed Wednesday highly vulnerable.

Officials in Sadr’s office in Sadr City would not comment on whether the bombings would provoke a resurgence of the Mahdi Army, although they declared that the attacks underscored the failure of the joint U.S.-Iraqi security plan.

“The security situation is worsening,” said Adil Mehdi Mutiri, one of the top political officials at Sadr’s organization. “The security plan might have been declared a success in the media, but it has failed on the ground.”

An outburst of violence from the Shiite militia would ease pressure on the Sunni insurgents, creating a second front for U.S. and Iraqi soldiers struggling to diminish violence in the capital and provide time for the Iraqi government to gather momentum for sectarian reconciliation.

That effort was thrown into doubt Monday when Sadr ordered six Cabinet ministers to quit over Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s refusal to set a timetable for U.S. withdrawal. Although Sadr’s bloc will retain its 30 parliamentary seats, the Cabinet pullout distances Sadr from al-Maliki in a bid to reassure the Shiite cleric’s loyalists, who have questioned his low profile since the beginning of the new security clampdown.

U.S. officials have reported a decrease in sectarian killings in Baghdad since the U.S.-Iraqi security crackdown was launched Feb. 14. But the past week has seen several major attacks in the capital, including a suicide bombing inside parliament and a powerful blast that collapsed a landmark bridge across the Tigris River. The number of bodies dumped in the streets of Baghdad also has risen significantly.

The Texas state House of Representatives has taken the first step in stopping construction of the controversial Trans-Texas Corridor, a key element of the so-called NAFTA Superhighway. In a measure that passed the House yesterday, representatives voted to place a two-year moratorium on construction of toll roads in the state. According to the Brenham (Texas) Banner-Press, the bill “would put the brakes on the Trans-Texas Corridor, a superhighway that a private firm received a contract for earlier this year.”

The measure was sponsored in the legislature by state representative Lois Kolkhorst. “This is us tapping the brakes, looking before we leap … into contracts that last 50-plus years,” Kolkhorst said of the measure.

The state of Texas had previously contracted construction of the parts of the highways to the Spanish firm Cintra-Zachry which would build and operate the toll roads of the corridor. “It boils down to whether the 10th largest economy in the world (Texas) can build its own highways or if we’re going to give private equities the chance to take all the profits from Texas,” Kolkhorst said according to the San Antonio Express-News.

The measure now must pass the Texas Senate where it has been under consideration by the Transportation and Homeland Security Committee. According to the Express-News, Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst “has directed … Security Committee Chairman John Carona to allow the panel to approve the bill.”

The Senate version of the measure was sponsored by Sen. Robert Nichols who formerly served on the state’s Transportation Commission. So far, the 27 of 31 state Senators have signed on to the measure and Nichols expects it to pass. “We need to call a time-out. We need to fix this problem, and we need to fix it right,” Nichols said of the situation with the Trans-Texas Corridor. “The current plan removes the control of your future transportation system out of your own hands. It sells the future revenues at a discount, and it’s designed to extract exorbitant toll rates.”

The Texas legislation has important ramifications for the rest of the nation as well. As the current special issue of The New American magazine thoroughly explains, the Trans-Texas Corridor is part of the physical infrastructure that is being built as part of plans to deepen the integration of Mexico, the United States, and Canada in a North American economic community that is a precursor to further union.

Stopping the construction of the Trans-Texas Corridor is an important step in the ongoing effort to keep America free and independent.

Women are facing widespread sexual harassment and even rape by their male comrades in the military. The threat of sexual violence against female soldiers by their male colleagues is so great that women are warned not to out to the bathroom alone at night. This has resulted in women stopping drinking fluids at 3:00 in the afternoon and has even led to deaths due to dehydration.

How common are these problems? It is difficult to tell since the military has not published a complete survey but indications are that 80% have faced sexual harassment and 30% have been raped. This is a disgrace that should be resulting in hearings on Capitol Hill, independent investigations, policy changes and loud cries by women’s rights activists. It should be a bigger scandal than the problems at Walter Reed but so far there is mostly silence.

Women fighting in Iraq face two sources of potential post traumatic stress disorder: the traditional combat related action; and sexual assault and harassment by their fellow soldiers. With regard to combat related PTSD, while women are generally limited to combat-support roles, they are still witnessing a historic amount of violence. Roadside bombs and blind ambushes, civilians who look like insurgents and resistance fighters who look like civilians limits the difference between the stress of combat units and support units.

The rapes and sexual harassment of Navy women at Tailhook in 1991 and of Army women at Aberdeen in 1996 became national news. Regarding sexual violence there are sources showing widespread harassment and rape.

– A 2003 report financed by the Department of Defense revealed that nearly one-third of a nationwide sample of female veterans seeking health care through the V.A. said they experienced rape or attempted rape during their service. Of that group, 37 percent said they were raped multiple times, and 14 percent reported they were gang-raped.

– A 2004 study of veterans from Vietnam and all the wars since, who were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder, found that 71 percent of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while in the military.

– An earlier study, conducted in 1992-93 with female veterans of the Gulf War and earlier wars, 90 percent said they had been sexually harassed in the military, which means anything from being pressured for sex to being relentlessly teased and stared at.

– The results of a change in policy in 2005 allowing sexual assaults to be reported confidentially in “restricted reports” resulted in the number of reported assaults across the military jumping 40 percent, to 2,374, but still most are not reported.

– The V.A. has diagnosed possible PTSD in some 34,000 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans; nearly 3,800 of them are women. With regard to women, nearly every expert interviewed by writer Sarah Corbett mentioned the reportedly high rates of sexual harassment and sexual assault in the military.

– A nine-month study of military rape by the Denver Post in 2003 found that nearly 5,000 accused military sex offenders had avoided prosecution since 1992.
One of the shocking pieces of information coming out of the Iraq War is widespread reports that women are not being safe going to the latrine at night. Author Helen Benedict reported on her research of Iraq soldiers DemcoracyNow!: “quite a few of them told me that they were ordered to not go out at night alone and not to go to the latrines or the showers without a buddy, without another woman. This was not being told to the men . . . it was a universal recognition that it was dangerous for women out there. And they weren’t talking about danger from the Iraqis, they were talking about, as I’ve said, danger from their fellow soldiers.”
DemcoracyNow! also included the testimony of Col. Janis Karpinski, who testified last year at a mock trial known as the Bush Crimes Commission Hearings.
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: Because the women, in fear of getting up in the hours of darkness to go out to the portoilets or the latrines, were not drinking liquids after 3:00 or 4:00 in the afternoon. And in 120-degree heat or warmer, because there was no air conditioning at most of the facilities, they were dying from dehydration in their sleep. And rather than make everybody aware of that, because that’s shocking — and as a leader, if that’s not shocking to you, then you’re not much of a leader — so what they told the surgeon to do was, “Don’t brief those details anymore. And don’t say specifically that they’re women. You can provide that in a written report, but don’t brief it in the open anymore.”
MARJORIE COHN: Was there a commander who saw dehydration listed as a cause of death of a woman, a woman female US soldier, and after that he said “Do not list dehydration as a cause of death anymore”?
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: Yes.
MARJORIE COHN: Who was that?
COL. JANIS KARPINSKI: General Sanchez [who served as the commander of the coalition forces in Iraq].
Benedict described men waiting outside who were pulling women into the latrines and abusing and raping them. She also said she went to “the Iraq casualty site, which lists all the deaths, and I did indeed find three deaths of women in the year she was talking about attributed to non-hostile causes, which the Army never seems to really explain, so I think it’s very possible those are three she was talking about.”
Also on Demcracy Now! Specialist Mickiela Montoya described how women would cut of the tops of water bottles in pee in them at night. She also described how she would carry a knife with her “to feel safe,” she explained “from the other soldiers.” She said when there was “any type of strong sexual harassment words spoken, I just mainly felt a little bit more secure, and [the knife] was visible, too, to the other soldiers.”
While confidential reports are now allowed most assaults go unreported. Sarah Corbett reported in The New York Times that women told her “You just don’t expect anything to be done about it anyway, so why even try?” DoD statistics demonstrate the validity of those feelings: of the 3,038 investigations of military sexual assault charges completed in 2004 and 2005, only 329 – about one-tenth – of them resulted in a court-martial of the perpetrator. More than half were dismissed for lack of evidence or because an offender could not be identified, and another 617 were resolved through milder administrative punishments, like demotions, transfers and letters of admonishment.
Sarah Corbett reports in “The Women’s War” published in the New York Times Magazine that: “More than one-quarter of female veterans of Vietnam developed PTSD at some point in their lives, according to the National Vietnam Veterans Readjustment Survey conducted in the mid-’80s, which included 432 women, most of whom were nurses. (The PTSD rate for women was 4 percent below that of the men.) Two years after deployment to the gulf war, where combat exposure was relatively low, Army data showed that 16 percent of a sample of female soldiers studied met diagnostic criteria for PTSD, as opposed to 8 percent of their male counterparts.”

The problems with sexual harassment, assault and rape are systemic in the military beginning with recruiters, military academies, carrying on through service and at the Veterans Administrations.

In 2006 Associated Press reported that “more than 100 young women who expressed interest in joining the military in the past year were preyed upon sexually by their recruiters. Women were raped on recruiting office couches, assaulted in government cars and groped en route to entrance exams.” According to the report more than 80 military recruiters were disciplined last year for sexual misconduct with potential enlistees. This included at least 35 Army recruiters, 18 Marine Corps recruiters, 18 Navy recruiters and 12 Air Force recruiters who were disciplined for sexual misconduct or other inappropriate behavior with potential enlistees in 2005. AP put together the report based on dozens of Freedom of Information Act requests.
The AP also found that this is not a new problem. For example, the Army, which accounts for almost half of the military, has had 722 recruiters accused of rape and sexual misconduct since 1996. And, one out of 200 frontline recruiters across all services was disciplined for sexual misconduct last year. As to punishment, most recruiters found guilty of sexual misconduct are disciplined administratively, facing a reduction in rank or forfeiture of pay. AP found that military and civilian prosecutions are rare.
At military academies, USA Today reports a 2004 Pentagon survey of the three military academies found 1 in 7 female cadets said they’d been victims of sexual abuse — ranging from unwanted advances to rape — during the previous five years. Only a third of the incidents were reported.
Helen Benedict, Professor at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism whose latest article, is “The Private War of Women Soldiers,” said on Democracy Now! that in the military “the harassment is almost universal — sexual harassment — throughout the military. Sometimes it’s more severe than others, but it mounts up, the stress of being constantly pressured for sex and constantly teased — makes it very hard to do one’s job. . . But there’s also the danger of sexual assault and rape. And all the soldiers I’ve talked to are very well aware of that. So they not only have to worry about the dangers of war, incoming fire and so on, but the danger of assault from the very people they’re supposed to trust.”
Benedict explains on DemcoracyNow! that “almost everybody is being harassed, but not every woman is being assaulted. The majority aren’t. And there are a lot of soldiers out there who — male soldiers — who treat the women as their sisters, just as they treat the other men as their brothers, and who are wonderful and reliable people. And the majority of them are like that.” She says one key to whether there is harassment is the attitude of the commander.
Thomas Berger, national chairman of Vietnam Veterans of America’s PTSD-and-substance-abuse committee, told Sarah Corbett: “The fact is, if a woman veteran comes in from Iraq who’s been in a combat situation and has also been raped, there are very few clinicians in the V.A. who have been trained to treat her specific needs.” Only 2 of the V.A.’s 1,400 hospitals and clinics have PTSD programs exclusively for women. The Bush administration recently announced that while it will increase V.A. health-care financing by 9 percent for 2008, it has proposed consecutive cuts of about $1.8 billion for 2009 and 2010.
There is not much action on this issue in the Congress. Senator Barak Obama has introduced a bill to put more resources into treatment of women. He described a woman he met at Walter Reed not that “many of the women in theater face first hand dangers in
their combat support roles. Driving a truck in Baghdad is one of the most dangerous missions around and that is a support role. Women are witnessing the horrors of improvised explosive devices and the horrors of losing fellow service members. And too many experience the trauma of sexual abuse.” He noted how the woman trembled when he spoke to her and explained how she could not handle group counseling sessions, but needed one-on-one support. He concluded “Treatment for women with PTSD, especially sexual abuse victims, is very different from treatment for men.” He proposed adding $15 million to address the unique mental health needs of women.

One case that received lots of attention was the case of Specialist Suzanne Swift. Swift, faced redeployment to Iraq while serving under the command of the same individuals that allowed her to be raped and sexual harassed. She suffered a breakdown due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, and went absent without leave rather than subject herself to the horrors she experienced during her first tour of duty. Her violators warned her that no one would believe her saying: “Swift, you look like you are going to tell someone about what happened between us. Nobody will believe you.” They were right. In January, she faced a court martial and was stripped of her rank and sentenced to jail for 30 days. No action was taken against her commander in Iraq, and another harrasser man was given a letter of admonishment – a slap on the wrist. Suzanne Swift has advice for women being recruited by the military, “for the women who are considering going into it, don’t.”

Another case that has received less attention, but may have ended in murder is the case of Private LaVena Johnson. Johnson died in 2005 and the military claims it was a suicide. Her father believes that the death began with a sexual assault, LaVena then went for health care to make sure she had not caught any sexually transmitted disease and LaVena shared the name of her attacker. He believes that led to her murder. Indications that it was not a suicide include:
• Evidence of physical abuse that went unremarked by the autopsy
• The absence of psychological indicators of suicidal thoughts; indeed, testimony that LaVena was happy and healthy prior to her death
• Indications, via residue tests, that LaVena may not even have handled the weapon that killed her
• A blood trail outside the tent where Lavena’s body was found
• Indications that someone attenpted to set LaVena’s body on fire as well as the crime scene on fire.
The military is refusing to re-open the investigation.
Women are playing important roles in the U.S. armed services but are facing abuse they should not have to endure. More than 160,500 U.S. women have served in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East since the war began in 2003, which means one in seven soldiers is a woman. Women now make up 15% of active duty forces, four times more than in the 1991 Gulf War. At least 450 women have been wounded in Iraq, and 71 have died — more female casualties and deaths than in the Korean, Vietnam and first Gulf Wars combined. And women are fighting in combat. But, if the problems of harassment, assault and rape are not dealt with the future of women in the military is uncertain and problematic.
For more information:
Sarah Corbett, The Women’s War, New York Times, March 3, 2007,http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/03/19/america/web.0319-women.php?page=1
DemocracyNow!, “The Private War of Women Soldiers: Female Vet, Soldier Speak Out on Rising Sexual Assault Within US Military,” Thursday, March 8th, 2007, http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/03/08/1443232&mode=thread&tid=25, provides both a transcript and audio of an interview by Amy Goodman.
Helen Benedict, “The Private War of Women Soldiers”, March 7, 2007, www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/03/07/women_in_military, see also: http://www.helenbenedict.com.
Sexual Abuse by Military Recruiters, CBS News, August 20, 2006, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/19/national/main1913849.shtml
Website for Suzanne Swift, http://www.suzanneswift.org
Website for LaVena Johnson, http://www.lavenajohnson.com
For Help:
Women Helping Women, http://www.vetwow.com
Kevin Zeese is executive director of Democracy Rising (www.DemocracyRising.US) and co-founder of Voters For Peace (www.VotersForPeace.US).

MOSCOW — The United States is planning to launch a war with Iran with a salvo of cruise missiles against military and other strategic facilities, a Russian official said.

A leading Russian analyst close to the government of President Vladimir Putin said the Bush administration has been preparing a major air strike against Iran. The analyst said the Iranian release of 15 British Marines abducted in early April has hampered but not canceled U.S. attack plans. “Preparations to strike Iran’s strategic facilities continue,” Col. Gen. Leonid Ivashov, president of the Academy for Geopolitical Problems, said. “Three major groups of U.S. forces are still in the Arabian Sea and the Persian Gulf. Altogether, they have up to 450 cruise missiles on alert.”

[On Tuesday, the London-based A-Sharq Al Awsat daily quoted French military sources that assessed a U.S. strike on Iran in 2007. The sources said Iran could be making a major mistake in underestimating U.S. intentions and capabilities.]

The assessment was the latest by government-financed Russian military analysts that warned of a U.S. war against Iran. Over the last two weeks, some analysts have raised the prospect of a U.S. air strike over the next few weeks.

“Combat nuclear weapons may be used for bombing,” Ivashov said. “This will result in radioactive contamination of the Iranian territory, which could possibly spread to neighboring countries.”

On April 8, Ivashov, who heads a government think tank, told the Interfax-AVN news agency that the U.S. Navy would be the lead service in the military campaign against Iran. He said the attack would begin with a salvo of advanced cruise missiles.

“Military operations against Teheran will begin with the launch of at least two unexpected strikes using Tomahawk cruise missiles and air power in order to disable Iran’s air defense capabilities,” Ivashov said.

The general said the U.S. military plans to employ up to 150 fighter-jets in the two air strikes on Iran. In the first stage, he said, the United States would destroy Iran’s air defense umbrella, including the new Russian-origin TOR-M1 mobile surface-to-air missile systems.

Ivashov said the U.S. campaign would target command centers, air defense batteries, naval vessels and air bases. In the second stage, the general said, the U.S. military would target Iran’s nuclear facilities.

“Nuclear facilities may be secondary targets,” Ivashov said. “According to expert assessments, at least 20 such facilities need to be destroyed in order to stop Iran’s nuclear program.”

Ivashov said Iran could respond by firing the Shihab-3E intermediate-range missile toward Israel. He said this could result in Israeli nuclear retaliation.

“If Iran strikes back at Israel with missiles, Tel Aviv is likely to use nuclear weapons on Iran,” Ivashov said. “Development of the situation would undermine stability not only in the Middle East, but also in the entire world.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on RUSSIA SAYS US IS GOING TO ATTACK “IRAN”